Summary
Improper handling and loading of market-ready turkeys during live haul presents significant challenges in the U.S. turkey industry. Bird injuries, such as bruises, scratches, and/or fractured or broken bones compromise animal welfare and lead to economic losses. However, the factors contributing to these handling challenges remain understudied. We aimed to identify barriers to implementing proper handling and loading techniques for market-ready turkeys through focus groups with commercial live haul crews. Participants identified three key themes: animal, farm, and human factors. Animal factors, such as bird sex, age, weight, and mobility, required crew members to modify handling strategies and varied the efficiency of live haul. The farm factors centered on the importance of preparing the barn environment for live haul. Adjusting lighting, ensuring good litter quality, scheduling nighttime shifts, using loading equipment correctly, and maintaining stable temperatures improve bird movement. Human factors included employee training methods, where informal training was the primary way in which crew members learned how to perform their tasks; the physical demands of the job, especially in challenging situations; and specific handling strategies to efficiently move birds and minimize injuries to animals and crew members. Animal, farm, and human factors are often interconnected, which compounds the complexity of ensuring proper animal handling for live haul. Future research in formal training, the design of farms, loading equipment, and personal protective equipment may mitigate the effects of these factors. Additionally, proactive teamwork and communication amongst veterinarians, producers, and live haul crews would better prepare farms for live haul.
Description of problem
The United States is the world’s leading producer of turkeys, with an industry valued at approximately $7.10 billion (Johnson, 2018). In 2022 alone, 210 million turkeys were raised, producing 6.66 billion pounds of turkey meat (USDA NASS, 2023). Turkeys are typically raised for 10 to 20 weeks, depending on bird sex, size, and product criteria for markets (Marchewka et al., 2019; National Turkey Federation, 2023). Once the market weight is achieved, turkeys are loaded and transported to slaughter plants for processing in an event commonly referred to in the industry as “load out” or “live haul” (henceforth referred to as live haul; Barnes et al., 2013).
Live haul is a critical production stage and requires extensive skill and training to be performed properly. Live haul crews typically consist of six to eight personnel who are responsible for herding and handling birds onto the truck for slaughter. Upon arrival, live haul crew members assess the facility to ensure feeders, waterers, and any other physical structures (e.g., environmental enrichments) have been raised or moved to remove any potential physical obstacles for bird movement. Following this, crew members build a funnel-shaped structure to create a confined, narrowing area to guide small groups of birds onto the truck. Crew members then herd small groups of turkeys (approximately 50 birds) towards the funnel using herding tools such as plastic bags or flag sticks (i.e., shredded plastic bags on the end of a stick) to the funnel entrance while additional crew members bring up even smaller bird groups (approximately 10 to 25 birds) through the funnel to the conveyor belt for loading. Turkeys are moved onto a slightly inclined conveyor belt that can be raised and lowered to reach truck transport coops (e.g., up to approximately 4 meters high; CMC Industries, 2022). The birds travel a short distance on the belt (e.g., approximately 8.5 to 10.5 meters in length) to be either manually placed or automatically loaded into the coops (US Poultry and Egg Association, 2016; CMC Industries, 2022; European Food Safety Authority, 2022; Bright Coop, 2024).
Although much effort has been made to safeguard turkey welfare by emphasizing appropriate handling in auditing programs (National Turkey Federation, 2024), improper handling of turkeys continues to remain a challenge for the industry (Rubinkam, 2022). Improper loading techniques can result in turkeys experiencing bruises, scratches, skin abrasions, and/or fractured or broken bones (Prescott et al., 2000). These physical injuries represent animal-based measures indicative of poor welfare and can result in substantial economic losses associated with downgraded carcasses at the processing plant (USDA AMS, 1998; van Staaveren et al., 2020). There is no publicly available data on the prevalence of injury-associated downgrades at federally inspected slaughter plants in the US; however, over 1,300 turkey carcasses were condemned in 2023 due to bruising (USDA NASS, 2024). Drawing on data from approximately 1.4 million turkeys, data from studies conducted in Canada reported that 10 % of toms and hens had bruised legs and 11.7 % of hens required wing trimming due to carcass defects (McEwen and Barbut, 1992). Similar issues were noted in turkey production in France in which 60 flocks of turkeys displayed high rates of fresh bruises indicative of trauma occurring during the live haul stage (cumulative recent bruises on the body or hip: 7 % versus 0.6 % old bruises; cumulative recent bruises on the wings: 6.4 % versus 1.6 % old bruises; Allain et al., 2013).
The underlying reasons for improper handling techniques during turkey live haul remain unclear. Understanding handlers’ perspectives and challenges while herding and loading turkeys is crucial for improving turkey handling practices on commercial farms. Therefore, the objective of this study was to identify factors that hinder the effective implementation of proper handling and loading techniques for market-ready turkeys through the use of focus groups with commercial live haul crews.
Materials and methods
All research was reviewed and approved by the North Carolina State University IRB Committee for Human Subjects Research (protocol #26106).
Study population and participant recruitment
Turkey producers located in the Eastern and Southeastern United States were recruited for the project using a combination of telephone calls, e-mails, and in-person recruiting at conference and extension events. Farms that expressed interest in participating worked directly with the authors to determine eligibility, and to plan and schedule visits. Thus, a convenience sampling methodology was implemented. To participate in the study, participants were required to have experience handling and loading market-ready turkeys and were offered a $50 gift card for completing the focus group.
Data collection
Focus groups were conducted in person between December 2023 to October 2024. Four companies located in Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North Carolina participated in the study, and a total of six focus groups were completed. Focus groups were conducted in either Spanish (n = 2) or English (n = 4), depending on the participants’ preference, and lasted between 40 and 60 minutes. The number of participants per focus group ranged from four to nine (38 participants in total). Prior to the initiation of the focus group, each participant received an individual consent form, a demographic survey, and a random number as their identification to anonymize individuals. All participants were made aware that the focus group would be audio-recorded to ensure accuracy in the data. Participants were reminded that participation was voluntary and that they could leave the focus group at any time, or decline to answer question(s).
One moderator and one assistant were present at each focus group to facilitate the discussions. Across the focus groups, the moderator and assistant varied and consisted of professors with expertise in animal welfare (ANP, MDPG); a professor with expertise in multilingualism and qualitative research methods (MC); a Master’s degree student studying poultry science (LAH); and a Doctoral student studying multilingualism and educational equity (AA). Four of the five team members were bilingual and biliterate in Spanish. The discussion was prompted using seven questions (Table 1). The moderator posed follow-up questions as needed to stimulate further discussion.
Table 1. Questions asked during focus groups with commercial live haul crews about handling and loading market-ready turkeys.
| Order | Question |
|---|---|
| 1 | What is your experience with handling turkeys? |
| 2 | Can you please describe the process for catching and loading market-ready turkeys? |
| 3 | Under what conditions would you not handle or load a bird? |
| 4 | How did you learn how to catch and load turkeys? |
| 5 | What situations have you experienced that made handling turkeys difficult? |
| 6 | What strategies or techniques have you used when faced with these difficult situations? |
| 7 | What external factors would help you handle turkeys better? |
Discussion analysis
The focus groups were transcribed and coded using the qualitative data analysis software NVivo15 (NVivo version 15, Lumivero, Denver, CO) by two independent researchers employing the thematic analysis method outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006). Coder one was a Poultry Science Master’s student (LAH). Coder two was a postdoctoral research scholar in animal welfare with a PhD and expertise in animal production and physiology (VRM). Both coders were bilingual and biliterate in Spanish.
Thematic analysis was used to summarize the data and discover patterns throughout the analytical process. The first focus group served as the exploratory group. After transcription and familiarization with the data, an initial codebook was developed with codes that emerged from the raw data (data-driven). Initial open coding fostered the creation of major themes, followed by axial coding that identified connections within themes to generate subthemes. This process was repeated by adding the other five focus groups, following the methodology outlined by DeCuir-Gunby et al. (2011). Themes and subthemes were also guided by existing literature. The two coders had excellent inter-rater reliability of 0.8 Cohen’s kappa.
Results and discussion
A total of 25 English-speaking and 13 Spanish-speaking Latin-American turkey handlers participated in six focus groups (38 participants in total; 42 ± 13.7 min duration, mean ± SD). Four focus groups were conducted in English (n = 9, 4, 6, and 6 participants in each group), and two focus groups were conducted in Spanish (n = 5 and 8 participants in each group). Participants were predominantly male (92 %) and ranged in age from 18 to 73 years old. Ninety-two percent of participants reported having loaded market-ready turkeys in the past six months, indicating recent handling and loading experience. From an education standpoint, 71 % of participants stated that they had completed high school and 13 % had some college education. Six individuals participating in the focus groups did not provide educational information (16 %). Participants’ experience working with turkeys varied widely, ranging from 1 day to 50 years. Twenty-six percent of participants had been working with turkeys for less than 1 year, 21 % for 1 to 5 years, 8 % for 6 to 9 years, 21 % for 10 to 19 years, 21 % for 20 to 35 years, and 3 % for ≥ 36 years.
Themes and subthemes
The data revealed three key themes (Table 2) and multiple interrelated subthemes (Fig. 1) addressing challenges with implementing appropriate handling techniques of market-ready turkeys. The themes were animal, farm, and human factors. Table 3 includes representative quotes from each subtheme.
Table 2. Themes and subthemes identified with thematic analyses of focus groups about the challenges of implementing appropriate handling techniques for market-ready turkeys.
| Themes | Subthemes |
|---|---|
| Animal factors | Injury, Disease, Sex, Age, Production type |
| Farm factors | Farm characteristics, Environmental conditions, Scheduling logistics, and Equipment |
| Human factors | Informal training, Learning by experience, Formal training, Human safety concerns, Physical endurance, Handling strategy |
Fig. 1. Thematic map showing the three main themes affecting proper handling and loading techniques of market-ready turkeys, as identified through focus groups with live haul crew members. Themes are color coded to correspond to their subthemes and connected by dashed lines. Subthemes with bold text were the most discussed subthemes during the focus groups. The gray solid lines represent connections between the subthemes.
Table 3. Principle themes and subthemes discussed by focus group participants, the proportion of comments, and a direct quote representing each theme. Focus group participants consisted of commercial turkey live haul crew members discussing factors that influenced the handling and loading of market-ready turkeys.
| Themes | Subthemes | % of discussion | Direct quotes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Animal factors | |||
| Sex | 5.8 | “If you got toms, they are nosy, they are going to come up, they want to know what you’re doing up there…” | |
| Age | 0.4 | “Age is definitely a big thing, depending on how old they are… more younger, they’re more willing to do things. And as they get older, they’re more likely [to] lay down and you’ve got to manually pick them up… because they won’t move for you”. | |
| Injury | 3.2 | “If you have 4/5 birds piling up, then you have to stop what you are doing and unpile them. Otherwise, you will have birds smattered on the bottom”. | |
| Disease | 2.8 | “We had a flock that had real severe arthritis….there’s one that’s very memorable to all of us because we were still loading at noon the next day”. | |
| Production Type | 0.7 | “They built too much weight for their muscle to handle…” | |
| Farm factors | |||
| Environmental conditions | 8.4 | “If the light is too dim, they don’t want to move. And you can’t have them too bright because they don’t want to move”. | |
| Scheduling logistics | 1.3 | “A lot of that is out of my control because the plant dictates what they want that day”. | |
| Farm characteristics | 12.3 | “There are also some ugly farms, and when the trucks turn around, the transporters have to struggle a lot. We have also had to struggle because the trucks are delayed, and the more experienced coworkers come out and help the transporters”. | |
| Equipment | 11.4 | “If you have an automatic belt, in 22 minutes, you can have 800 birds on the truck”. | |
| Human factors | |||
| Informal training | 5.6 | “He brought him in, signed the paper and sent him with the crew”. | |
| Formal training | 2.8 | “Training videos show you how to carry the birds, they show you how to move the birds”. | |
| Learning by experience | 4.9 | “It takes time, long time…but from one year ahead, more or less, people defend themselves well”. | |
| Human safety concern | 9.2 | “One [turkey] jumped up and scratched me in the face. I was down for two sets…” | |
| Physical endurance | 6.1 | “At some point when you’re loading turkeys, you’re going to start getting fatigued, you run out of stamina. It starts getting harder”. | |
| Handling strategy | 25.3 | “You want to take as small drives as you can. You don’t want to over-pack them because then you can pack the belt too much”. |
Theme 1: Animal factors
The animal factors theme included topics related to physical bird characteristics that influenced the handling process (i.e., birds’ sex, age, injuries, disease status, and production type). Several participants mentioned distinct challenges based on bird sex as toms and hens differ significantly in their behavioral responses and size (toms: 18 to 23 kg; hens: 4.5 to 9 kg). From a behavioral standpoint, toms were described as more curious, confrontational, and stronger than hens, which made herding and loading less efficient and more challenging. One participant described this experience as follows:
“if you got toms, they are nosy, they are going to come up, they want to know what you’re doing up there…”
Similarly, the size of the toms also influenced handling and loading, with live haul crew members recognizing that they needed to be more strategic with toms in order to maintain proper handling. One participant stated:
“…super toms might get 50 pounds, … when you say 40 pounds, you don’t think of that as life-changing weight. So you pick up a 40-pound bag of dog food … No big deal, right? Well, what happens when that 40-pound bag of dog food starts fighting back with every ounce of strength in his body? Because that’s basically what they do. When you go to grab him, you got about a split second where he doesn’t know what’s going on, and that’s the transition where you grab him and put him in the cage.”
In addition to size, toms were also generally described as more aggressive and territorial than hens, likely due to increased testosterone as they approach sexual maturity at market weight (Kiezun et al., 2015). Toms commonly demonstrate higher prevalences of injuries associated with aggressive head pecking compared to hens (Dalton et al., 2013; Ferrante et al., 2019), and this behavior may often be redirected toward load crew members, making it additionally challenging to handle large and aggressive birds.
Hens can also present their own unique challenges during live haul. Hens were described as flightier and more reactive than toms with higher risks of wing flapping, piling, and jumping off of the loader (Weeks and Nicol, 2000). These behaviors can potentially lead to injuries, particularly broken and fractured wings, resulting in consequent carcass downgrades at the processing plant.
Age and mobility were identified as significant factors influencing herding and handling of market ready turkeys. As turkeys age, the angulation of the femorotibial articulation (i.e., the joint connecting the femur and tibia) changes to accommodate increasing weight, which reduces mobility of the birds (Oviedo-Rondón et al., 2018). This concern was noted by a participant that stated:
“…age, is definitely a big thing, depending on how old they are… more younger, they’re more willing to do things. And as they get older, they’re more likely [to] lay down and you’ve got to manually pick them up… because they won’t move for you”.
Bird age coupled with leg health have significant impacts on bird mobility and the efficacy of the handling process. Turkeys typically display higher levels of lameness and immobility as they age and increase in size, often due to increasing prevalences of footpad dermatitis from prolonged contact with high moisture litter (footpad dermatitis prevalence: 33.8 % toms, 60 % hens; Mitterer-Istyagin et al., 2011). In addition, turkey avian reovirus, or reoviral arthritis, is a current disease challenge in the U.S. turkey industry affecting mobility, with as much as 40 % of the flock displaying clinical signs of lameness (Porter, 2018). Lameness associated with this virus is progressive, presenting as early as 8 to 12 weeks of age and worsening over time (Porter, 2018; Sharafeldin et al., 2015). Affected birds show swollen hocks (tibiotarsal joint) in one or both legs with fluid accumulation, edema, fibrosis, tenosynovitis, and occasional tendon ruptures (Mor et al., 2013; Porter, 2018). There is currently not an effective commercial vaccine for reoviral arthritis, so this remains a current and challenging health issue that impacts the live haul crews. In addition, non-infectious conditions such as toe deformities, leg fractures, and bone and cartilage abnormalities may also influence mobility (Dalton et al., 2016). Communication between veterinarians, farmers, and live haul crews is critical to ensure those handling the birds are aware of compromised flocks before arriving at the farm.
Taken together, sex, age, weight, and mobility were identified as specific factors impacting herding and handling of market-ready birds. Additional considerations including the use of specialized equipment to move less mobile or heavy birds and utilizing proper herding techniques (e.g., smaller groups, less use of herding tools) may improve these animal-based specific challenges during live haul.
Theme 2: Farm factors
Participants highlighted how farm factors, such as farm characteristics, environmental conditions, scheduling logistics, and equipment, influenced the techniques and efficiency of handling and loading market-ready turkeys. Environmental conditions within and outside the barn stood out as a critical component impacting the success of handling and herding outcomes for live haul crews. Light intensity was identified as a key component during the loading process. One participant noted:
“If the light is too dim, they don’t want to move. And you can’t have them too bright because they don’t want to move.”
Light intensity plays a critical role in regulating bird activity, where low light intensities or darkness increase melatonin production and subsequently decrease bird activity (Schwean-Lardner et al., 2016; Pal et al., 2019; Prusik and Lewczuk, 2019). Turkeys need to be active to herd towards the conveyor belt, so light is used in the barn to maintain flock activity. However, if the interior light is too bright, turkeys may become overly active and flighty and become more challenging for crew members to herd. Therefore, light intensity must be adequate to ensure overall flock activity but low enough to prevent excessive flightiness.
Most crews interviewed worked nighttime shifts, where turkey behavior is typically calmer. However, several participants noted brighter exterior light intensity creates challenges, such as when there is a full moon during a nighttime shift or loading during the daytime. As mentioned by one participant:
“In the summertime, we definitely do day loads. Definitely, hens are more jumpy. We get toms out there too during the day loads; they flap more during day loads than night loads…”
Similarly, another participant mentioned:
“It takes strength and willpower to do it to make it through a day load.”
Outdoor illuminance has higher light intensity than in-barn recommendations (80 lux; Aviagen, 2022) and fluctuates widely based on geographic conditions, elevation, and weather (Lanca et al., 2019). The abrupt exposure to higher light intensities increases bird activity, complicating handling. Additional considerations specific to lighting should include loading turkeys during the night to maintain a dark environment between the loader and the transport trailer if scheduling permits (Barnes et al., 2013; Trampel et al., 2013)
The temperature inside the barn also influences bird behavior with respect to handling. Turkeys were reported to be less active if the house was too hot or too cold, and ventilation management was noted as a challenge. Crew members often do not have access to barn equipment controllers to regulate temperature, and producers with access may not be readily available during all live hauls. Even in properly managed houses, temperature within the flock can be influenced by outside temperature and changes to flock density, as described by this participant:
“…[after loading one side of the house] and they are gone, then that’s just an empty space. And all the turkeys are on this [other] side, and it’s just that you can start to see a change in the temperature [in the house]. And you can see your breath inside the house, and then you start…kind of worrying about what the turkeys are going to do.”
The thermoneutral zone in turkeys is 15.6 to 23.9°C, which represents the ambient temperature condition where turkeys can regulate their body temperature (Noll, 2022). Outside of this temperature range, birds modify their behavior to facilitate heat production or heat loss in an attempt to regain the thermoneutral zone (Schwartzkopf-Genswein et al., 2012). Henrikson et al. (2018) evaluated the impact of 8 hours of cold exposure (0°F or −18°C) on the behavior of 12 to 16-week-old turkeys, finding that 30 to 52 % of the birds’ time budget was spent huddling to reduce heat loss by minimizing the body surface area exposed to the cold. These findings support how turkeys decrease their activity during low temperatures and consequently become more difficult to herd towards the conveyor belt in cold conditions.
Participants also noted a significant impact of outdoor weather conditions (hot or cold) hindering bird movement. These factors required adjustments to loading schedules, like waiting for cooler times of the day to begin loading for both turkey and human welfare. For the latter, one participant mentioned:
“If it’s cool and we got a lot of loads, I’ll try to start them off a little early. If it’s hot, and then of course we’re going to try to start out when the sun goes down. So you know [the crew members are] not out there… about to pass out in the heat because it’s a physical job.”
With regard to the turkeys, another participant mentioned:
“You gotta watch the temperature and if [you] get [the turkeys] too cold, they won’t walk. Get them too hot, they won’t walk. You got to keep it right. Just right.”
Birds exhibit behavioral changes in response to heat or cold stress caused by external environment conditions like hot or cold weather (Liu et al., 2022; Poku et al., 2024). These behaviors are consistent with those observed when temperature fluctuations occur inside a turkey barn. Sudden exposure to extreme temperatures can amplify stress and hinder mobility, making it challenging for crew members to move them effectively. Strong winds were also noted to disrupt birds’ movement, highlighting the need for different loading techniques, such as using additional tarps around the barn doors to block drafts:
“If the air is coming through that door, and it’s really heavy and strong. A lot of times turkeys, some of them don’t want to go through it. That air hits them and … they just stop. It’s just like a complete difference to them that they’re not used to all that air coming in on them at one time, especially in the winter time… that’s when you need to put the tarp up and stuff like that because then it keeps that air from coming in on them. And then they just …move a little bit better.”
The participant’s comment aligns with the concept of the windchill effect, where moving air dissipates heat from the turkey’s body, causing it to feel colder than the actual air temperature. This effect intensifies as temperatures drop due to the greater temperature difference between the bird and the surrounding air (Czarick and Lacy, 1996). Using tarps to reduce air movement minimizes the windchill effect, prevents heat loss from turkeys, and ultimately encourages better mobility and comfort for the birds.
In addition to light and temperature, litter management was also one of the most highlighted farm factors influencing turkey handling. Litter quality varies widely from farm to farm, depending on how it has been maintained throughout the life of the flock. Crews experiencing less consistent litter conditions stated that they needed to adapt their handling strategies accordingly, particularly if litter conditions affect the proper placement of equipment. One participant elaborated on the implications of poor litter management affecting the birds and the crew members:
“The only thing that I’ve really noticed is like … [litter] does make it hard on the turkeys driving them from one side of the house to the other because you have some holes in some houses, and it’s that deep! And then you have turkeys that fall in the holes, and then you get turkeys tripping over those turkeys. And then … that’s how you start getting broken wings and stuff like that. And it’s nothing you can do about it, because… you can’t fill every single hole all the way back to the house… you would be there all day trying to fill in the house just to get it started. But that’s like been a kind of a major issue, like we’ve been having with a lot of them… some of them are not as deep, but then you get some of them and it looks like trenches all the way through the house.”
Holes and uneven, compacted litter create hazards for injuries for the turkeys and crew members. The surface condition can also make it challenging for operating equipment, such as creating gaps between the loader belt and the ground that requires turkeys to step up onto the belt. Turkeys may trip or balk at the gap in the transition to stepping up onto the belt, which could result in piling or herding birds over fallen birds.
Litter condition was also linked back to animal factors. After a long production phase, litter moisture and caking increase and create higher risks for the incidence and severity of footpad dermatitis (Kuczynski and Ksenicz, 2002). One research group reported that only 4.7 % of 16- to 20-week-old toms had normal footpads (Da Costa et al., 2014). Caking is multifactorial though as it is associated with bird weight, diet, type of bedding, and management, in addition to high stocking densities in barns that lead to a build-up of feathers, feed, and excreta on the floor (Leishman et al., 2021).
Characteristics of the farm design and equipment were identified as subthemes within farm factors, primarily resulting in poor handling outcomes for birds. This included logistical challenges such as truck delays and disruptions during the loading process. Some farms have live haul doors located in the middle and on either end of the house, which is more convenient for crews to herd turkeys a shorter distance to the loader (Barnes et al., 2013; Powell and Co Construction, 2024). However, some farms only have live haul doors on either end of the house, resulting in longer distances for herding. Longer distances will take more time and also may be more challenging if additional animal-related factors affecting the birds’ mobility are present. Poor external conditions of the farm, such as road quality, were also mentioned as prolonging the loading process and not conducive for live haul. One participant specifically referred to these farm characteristics as “ugly”, noting:
“There are also some ugly farms, and when the trucks turn around, the transporters have to struggle a lot. We have also had to struggle because the trucks are delayed, and the more experienced colleagues come out and help the transporters. This has been reported to the farmers, but they do nothing to fix the situation. So I feel that they should fix the road there because at any moment this could cause an accident.”
Lastly, equipment and herding tools were commonly discussed as a factors impacting handling. Herding tools and loading equipment (e.g., manual versus automatic loaders) are selected typically by live haul crew preference and company availability of the equipment. Participants noted that red and orange colors for herding tools tended to be the most effective for bird movement, and plastic bags were the favored material for handling tools. Plastic bags are ideal for biosecurity as they are inexpensive, disposable, and can be left at a farm after live haul to minimize equipment moving between farms. Plastic bags are also lightweight and unlikely to injure animals and crew members. While all participants predominantly used manual loaders, those who had experience with automatic loaders noted how they significantly sped up the live haul process by reducing manual labor and truck maneuvering. This is similar to previous work conducted on automatic loading systems, showing that automated broiler loading can achieve loading times comparable to those of six crew members (Knierim and Gocke, 2003). However, automatic loaders were rarely used by individuals participating in the study, and future work should consider conducting focus groups with participants with more experience with automatic loaders.
Theme 3: Human factors
The human factors theme included any discussion regarding formal and informal training, learning through experience, safety concerns for crew members, physical endurance, and handling strategies implemented by the handlers. Balancing human and animal welfare while ensuring efficient handling of market-ready turkeys was one of the participants’ most highlighted concerns.
Focus group participants discussed how informal training was the primary method for training new employees, with many learning through observations of more experienced crew members rather than formal education. Further discussion also revealed the limited formal educational resources available for the humane handling of market-ready turkeys. Some participants noted that they began working without prior training or experience, and only a few mentioned having access to instructional videos. One of the handlers described the hiring process:
“He brought him in, signed the paper and sent him with the crew.”
Another participant reaffirmed:
“[…] to a person who has just entered, I say, look, this is how the job is. To start, put on your boots, put on your overalls. Second, grab your flags, go, follow this person, and he will tell you how you are going to cut, catching a few turkeys or more at a time.”
Formal training consists of having defined objectives and learning supports, an identifiable start and end, and is implemented with an educational method or by a training institution (Brown, 1989; Rubenson, 2007). While informal training occurs through everyday activities associated with work, it typically does not follow a structured framework as it excludes predefined learning objectives, designed learning periods, and organized learning support systems (Rubenson, 2007). Marsick (2009) discussed how informal learning can be challenging to standardize, while Dale and Bell (1999) mentioned that informal training can have other limitations like a narrow focus and the possibility of learning bad habits or incorrect lessons. Informal training has its benefits, however, such as being flexible, adaptable, and troubleshooting problems through regular practice. The relationship between informal and formal training is dynamic, with each complementing the other. Each type of training inspires new ideas, leading to a rewarding and meaningful learning experience (Kazi, 2008; Marsick, 2009). Incorporating more formal training for live haul crews may also help to reduce employee turnover. For example, when asked the follow-up question of, “What did they expect new employees to know before going to the farm?”, the participants answered that they wanted the new employees to be aware of the actual conditions and processes of loading turkeys. Some participants noted that without this background, some new hires only last one night after realizing the harsh conditions of the job.
Crew members also raised concerns about human safety. They described the physical risk of handling turkeys, mentioning injuries (e.g., broken fingers, broken noses, scratches) that occurred during the handling process, either from birds or equipment. One of the comments was:
“…One [turkey] jumped up and scratched me in the face. I was down for two sets…”
Participants also frequently mentioned physical endurance when handling and loading market-ready turkeys, emphasizing the need for stamina, strength, and resilience. These factors are particularly critical if other themes or subthemes are involved in prolonging the loading process. For example, one of them stated:
“At some point when you’re loading turkeys, you’re going to start getting fatigued, you run out of stamina. It starts getting harder.”
Animal factors, in particular, were often related to physical endurance. Participants stated that the physical challenge was higher in farms where bird mobility was limited, requiring the crew members to manually pick up individual birds and carry them to the loader. One of the participants said:
“If it’s a sickness to where the birds aren’t going to walk, I might end up being there 12 or 13 hours, picking birds up, using a wagon or a wheelbarrow or a skid loader or something like that. And if you’ve done that before, where it’s the middle of winter, and everybody is soaked from sweat because the birds are so sick, they won’t get up”.
Environmental exposure and physical labor associated with daily tasks put crew members at risk for potential injury. In addition, repetitive movements, poor posture, and long working hours contribute to musculoskeletal disorders, while excessive workload and insufficient rest cycles lead to stress (OSHA, 2013; Magri et al., 2021). A study involving 80 poultry workers revealed that over half needed better knowledge of occupational health hazards, likely due to a lack of training and limited access to personal protective equipment (Mahmoud et al., 2023) Taken together, conditions that prolong live haul and/or make the process more physically challenging reduce stamina, strength, and resilience, and proper handling strategies may deteriorate as a result.
Participants mentioned the use of strategic handling techniques to alleviate some of the challenges during the interactions between handlers and birds. For example, participants highlighted how effective teamwork and crew coordination are critical for minimizing injuries and ensuring smooth loading of the birds. As indicated by one of them:
“So there should be two people on the loader and then six people in the barn, and they work together to herd the birds into the corral, and then herd the birds in the corral onto the loader. So there, there’s always like two people on both sides of the corral, and there’s a handful of guys in the back of the corral. Normally, what they do is like three or four guys walk back, and they’ll cut a section of the herd, slowly move them in because you don’t … want to move 200 birds because if you got three or four guys, you can’t control that many birds. They’ll go to one side or the other and pile and kill each other. That, or they end up breaking each other’s legs … and then they’re hurting each other.”
Participants elaborated on the importance of herding smaller groups of birds to maintain control and reduce injury. The consensus across focus groups was to cut a small drive of approximately 50 birds from the flock to herd towards the loader. Once birds are inside the funnel, smaller drives of birds of approximately 10 to 25 turkeys are moved through the funnel to the conveyor belt to reduce the risk of piling. Another crew member complemented this strategy of herding the turkeys inside the barn:
“You want to take as small drives as you can. You don’t want to over-pack them because then you can pack the belt too much. And you just want to … let the turkey do the walk itself. … You don’t really want to shake the bag. You just want to kind of use it to kind of keep them going ahead of you. Too much shaking, then they’re going to go crazy. You just want to kind of walk with them and let them do the walk up onto the belt.”
According to Grandin (2021), effective handling relies on calm, stress-free methods that enhance productivity and ensure human safety. Proper training in fundamental animal behavior, such as flock behavior and handling techniques that utilize the flight zone and the point of balance, is essential for handlers to manage animals effectively. Turkeys are social animals and are motivated to move together as a flock (Beauchamp, 2022), as well as maintain distance from unfamiliar people, referred to as their flight zone. The point of balance is located at the animal’s shoulder and is influenced by its wide-angle vision; animals will move forward when a handler positions themselves behind this point (Grandin, 2022). Applying these concepts when handling market-ready turkeys alongside calm shaking of bags or flag sticks, as crew members mentioned, helps to minimize stress during handling.
Conclusions and applications
This study identified a variety of factors that affect the proper handling of market-ready turkeys that can influence both animal and human welfare. The data indicated that there are animal, farm, and human factors that affect handling and loading techniques. Live haul becomes even more challenging when these factors interact, and many factors are outside of the crew members’ control. Some suggestions and recommendations follow:
- 1.
Formal training is lacking for live haul crew members, which may lead to employee turnover and less consistency in proper animal handling. Formal training for new crew members and annual updates for existing crew members can be developed to standardize best handling practices across the industry, as well as communicate techniques for navigating challenging situations. Formal training tools would supplement existing informal training methods of having experienced crew members or other professionals model tasks in-person at the farms.
- 2.
Communication and teamwork between veterinarians, farmers, nutritionists, and live haul crews could improve animal and farm conditions to make the live haul process more efficient. For example, controlling and optimizing interior and exterior light intensity and maintaining consistent barn temperatures can ensure appropriate levels of bird activity and movement. Consistent and daily management of litter across the life of the flock will mitigate the effects of litter condition on footpad health, bird movement, and equipment setup. Programs that monitor and incentivize farmers for good litter condition may promote more consistent litter quality and subsequent bird mobility during live haul. If conditions are unable to be improved, advanced communication to live haul crews could better prepare them for a challenging flock (e.g., staffing a larger crew, bringing additional equipment and tools).
- 3.
Further research is needed into farm design (including placement of doors for loading and road design and condition for trucks), loading equipment (including mechanical methods to humanely move lame birds inside a house), and personal protective equipment to mitigate the effects of challenging flocks on crew member stamina, endurance, and resilience.
Source: Science Direct
